My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-25-1986 PC MIN
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Minutes
>
1980 - 1989
>
1986
>
02-25-1986 PC MIN
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:35:33 AM
Creation date
9/19/2005 3:24:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
PCM
date
2/25/1986
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />-~._----_., <br />, <br /> <br />PAGE 9 <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes <br />February 25, 1986 <br /> <br />Chairman Tralle opened the public hearing. <br /> <br />Mrs. Jean Brown resident of Elk Hills indicated she was concerned about an <br />additional entrance into this area. She further indicated it was a real <br />problem getting unto Highway 169. <br /> <br />Mr. Leo Pollack of Elk River Development Corporation indicated the terrain <br />is very extreme dictating to some extend as to where the roads are going <br />to go. Also because of the terrain dictates the price of the property. <br /> <br />Discussion was held regading the commerical lot. Mr. Pollack indicated <br />that parcel was unsuitable for residents because of the layout and <br />terrain. He further indicated the commercial area would not be developed <br />for at least 3 to 5 years. Mr. Pollack noted this was difficult property <br />to develop because of the terrain and that they were trying to work with <br />the city to develop this into a nice development and we need a lot of lots <br />to make this pay because of the sewer, water and roads. <br /> <br />Chairman Tralle closed the public hearing. <br /> <br />Further discussion was held regarding whether or not the City or Developer <br />should do the raods. <br /> <br />Phil Hals, the Street Superintendent, noted that the biggest draw back was <br />the access to the park. Is this a City park or a local development park? <br />Access was to well hidden and hard to find. If they were to build this in <br />phases he would like to see the roads completed after the second phase. <br /> <br />It was the concensus of the Planning Commission that Deerfield Third <br />provide a second access to a public road out of the subdivision to <br />alleviate traffic problems and for safety reasons in case one access is <br />blocked. It was also the concensus of the Planning Commission to have a <br />joint meeting with the City Council in March as not to hold the developer <br />up another month. <br /> <br />Consider Conditioanl Use Permit by Northern States Power/P.H. <br />Mr. Tom Bublitz, the City Administrator, indicated he would like to have a <br />draft of the EIS available before we make a decision on the conditional <br />use permit. <br /> <br />Chairman Tralle opened the public hearing. No one appeared for or against <br />the request. <br /> <br />Mr. Don Chimel of NSP indicated it might be to the City's advantage to <br />take a look at the plant in Newport. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.